A Methodology for Identifying Workers Exposed to Asbestos ... - NCBI

A Methodology for Identifying Workers Exposed to Asbestos Since 1940 MARTHA STANBURY, MSPH, Abstract: This paper describes a method to identify individual workplaces and to determine the number of employees at those workplaces who have had substantial exposure to asbestos. A total of 486,400 individuals are estimated to have had substantial exposure to asbestos in New Jersey since the start of World War II, including 102,700 individuals from 16 manufacturing plants, 376,200 from eight shipyards, and 7,500 insulators. (Am J Public Health 1987:

77:854-855.)

Introduction Several rough estimates of the population at risk for adverse health effects of asbestos in the United States have been made by using various mathematical modeling techniques. 1-3 In this report, we examine the feasibility of identifying and quantifying industrial cohorts in the State of New Jersey that have been exposed to asbestos since the beginning of World War II. The methodology used in this report is applicable to other states and can be considered as the first step of a program to notify individuals at risk of developing asbestos-related diseases.

Methods The major exposures to asbestos take place during its mining, the manufacture of asbestos products or products containing asbestos, in shipbuilding and repair, and construction work (especially insulation). Names of companies in the above categories, duration of each establishment's existence, and approximate numbers employed during that time are needed to identify and quantify potentially exposed cohorts. There are two major sources of this information: 1) State Departments of Labor which maintain a data base for unemployment insurance compensation sorted by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes of all companies in a state4; 2) Industrial Directories published by state every two or three years since the turn of the century.5 In each edition, one can find the name of a company classified by SIC code and/or product name, brief descriptions of company products and annual numbers employed. This information is compiled by the publisher from surveys of companies and from research in trade publications. From these sources, it was possible to identify asbestos manufacturing companies (SIC codes 3292 and 3293) and shipyards (SIC code 3731). There is no asbestos mining in New Jersey. Industries for which only half of the plants have been considered asbestos users were not included (SIC codes 2661, 3433, 3443, 3567, 3534 and parts of 28 and 29).2 Individuals in the construction industry were not included unless they were members of the International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers, which was ascertained directly from the asbestos insulators union. Address reprint requests to Martha Stanbury, Program Specialist, New Jersey Department of Health, Division of Occupational and Environmental Health, CN 360, Trenton, NJ 08625. Dr. Rosenman, formerly Director of Occupational and Environmental Health, NJDH, is currently consultant in that field, in Plainsboro, NJ. This paper, submitted to the Journal July 31, 1986, was revised and accepted for publication January 15, 1987.

(© 1987 American Journal of Public Health 0090-0036/87$1.50

854

AND KENNETH D.

ROSENMAN, MD

Other sources were used to verify information: the New Jersey State Records of Incorporation, books and articles about asbestos,6'0 discussions with workers' compensation lawyers and labor unions, and searches of library clippings and periodicals indexing files. Only companies with more than 100 employees were researched. To estimate the numbers exposed in these establishments, the following was done: * Annual employment, either given, or when not given estimated based on the last year where given, was recorded. Only males were included except for workers in asbestos textile plants where a high percentage of those in production

work are known to have been women. * One-third of each annual employment figure was subtracted to account for non-exposed management. * Annual new hires were calculated by multiplying the above by the average 1958-61 US new hire rates. For asbestos manufacturers this was 30 per cent. the new hire rate for SIC code 329, because new hire rates for SIC 3292 and 3293 were not available." For shipyards, since almost no employment data was available after 1940 until about 1950, new hires for that period were estimated simply by multiplying 1940 employment by a factor of 30 per cent. This factor was derived from Nicholson's employment data on shipyards.2 1950-79 new hires were based on the 1958-1960 average US new hire rate of 22 per cent for SIC code 3731. * The total number of exposed workers at each company was estimated by adding together initial annual employment and new hires for each subsequent year until the plant closed, until asbestos ceased being used, or until 1980, whichever came first.

Results and Discussion Sixteen major asbestos manufacturing plants in New Jersey were identified, and approximately 102,700 persons estimated to have been exposed to asbestos in these manufacturing plants from 1940 to 1979. about 20 per cent of the total number so exposed nationwide as estimated by Nicholson.2 Eight major shipyards were located. About 376,200 workers were calculated to have been exposed in the shipyards during that time, about 6 per cent of Nicholson's estimate nationwide.2 The total number of asbestos insulators exposed in New Jersey is estimated to be about 7,500, about 4 per cent of the national estimate. These estimates undoubtedly underestimate number of individuals exposed because secondary users of asbestos products and construction workers were not included. Knowing approximate numbers exposed makes it possible to allocate public health resources appropriately and effectively. Knowing the names of employers makes it possible to locate names of employees, and to notify those living of the health risks. With the use of Social Security records, this is possible even for companies that are out of business or whose personnel records have been destroyed. Workers have a basic and fundamental right to know they have been exposed to an occupational hazard and are at risk of contracting an occupational disease.'2 Personal notification provides a mechanism whereby individuals can have access to knowledge about prevention and treatment of asbestos-related diseases. AJPH July 1987, Vol. 77, No. 7

PUBLIC HEALTH BRIEFS

taining information about asbestos, and targeted major shipbuilding cities with a mass media campaign. One of the striking findings of a Gallup poll evaluation of that project was that the message of smoking cessation was not ttansmitted. 13 Individual notification specifically directed to high-risk individuals can transmit the smoking cessation message more effectively than a project with a large and undefined target population. Both public health and voluntary agencies such as the American Cancer Society and American Lung Association could prioritize their smoking cessation programs to these individuals and their communities. For example, in Camden, New Jersey, former site of a large shipyard, and across the river from Philadelphia, which has had two large shipyards, approximately 20 per cent of the lung cancer can be attributed to working with asbestos in shipyards.* The methodology in this report is readily applicable to identifying employers and their employees in other states. It took one of us (MS) only three weeks to gather the data on employers. State efforts at protecting citizens from the health hazards of chemicals need to be redirected to individuals at the highest risk of developing disease. Our methodology identifies some of those high-risk individuals. ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Part of this work was funded under a National Cancer Institute Contract NO I -CN-45212.

*Schoenberg J, Stemhagen A, Mason T, Patterson J, Bill T, Altman R: Occupation and lung cancer risk among New Jersey white males. Submitted for publication.

Future APHA

REFERENCES 1. Bridbord K, Decoufle P, Fraumeni JF, Hoel D. Hoover RN. Rail DP. Saffiotti V, Schneiderman MA, Upton AC: Estimates of the Fraction of Cancer in the United States Related to Occupational Factors. Report Prepared by National Cancer Institute. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 1978. 2. Nicholson WJ, Perkel G, Selikoff IJ: Occupational exposure to asbestos: Population at risk and projected mortality-1980-2030. Am J Indus Med 1982; 2:259-31 1. 3. Walker AM, Loughlin JE, Friedander ER, Rothman KJ. Dreyer NA: Projections of asbestos related disease 1980-2009. JOM 1983: 25:409-425. 4. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget: Standard Industrial Classification Manual. Washington, DC: Govt Printing Office, 1972. 5. MacRae's New Jersey State Industrial Directory. New York: MacRae's Blue Book, published annually since 1901. 6. Peters G, Peters B: Source Book on Asbestos Diseases: Medical, Legal and Engineering Aspects. New York: Garland Publishing, 1980. 7. Castleman B: Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects. New York: Harcourt. Brace, Jovanovich, 1984. 8. Fassett FG Jr (ed): The Ship Building Business in the United States of America, Vol. 1. New York: Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 1948. 9. Lane FC: Ships for Victory. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. 1951. 10. Brodeur P: Annals of Law: The Asbestos Industry on Trial. The New Yorker, 1985. 11. Bureau of Labor Statistics: Employment and Earnings, United States 1909-1978. Washington DC: BLS Bulletin. 1312-11. 1979. 12. Bayer R: Notifying workers at risk: the politics of the right-to-know. Am J Public Health 1986; 76:1352-1356. 13. Freimuth VS, Van Nevel JP: Reaching the public: The asbestos awareness campaign. J Communications. 1981; 2:155-166.

Meeting Date

1987 OCTOBER 18-22 NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 1988 NOVEMBER 13-17 BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 1989 OCTOBER 22-26 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 1990 SEPTEMBER 30-OCTOBER 4 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 1991 NOVEMBER 10-14 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 1992 NOVEMBER 8-12 WASHINGTON, D.C. 1993 OCTOBER 24-28 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 1994 OCTOBER 30-NOVEMBER 3 WASHINGTON, D.C. 1995 NOVEMBER 12-16 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON

AJPH July 1987, Vol. 77, No. 7

855